User talk:Mabuska/Archive 42013/January

GAA clubs list
Good work with the columns. Much easier to work with. Brocach (talk) 18:54, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks? Please see the article talk page for a problem with the columns for several county boards and a suggestion on trimming the article more. Mabuska (talk) 18:59, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Ad hominem
Ad hominem is an argument made personally against an opponent instead of against their argument. "Oh yes Scolaire, it is generally accepted that if you edit a comment you've already made and have already had responses to, that you don't edit it afterwards but make a new comment after it" does not address any argument of mine in any way, shape or form. Therefore it is ad hominem. Plus, as I said, it is untrue. It is also – I will dare to say it here – childish in the extreme. Why do you expect me to engage with you as adult to adult while at the same time you lecture me on points of etiquette that you don't even umderstand yourself? Go ahead with your proposals and your counter-proposals and your counter-counter-proposals. They do nothing to improve Wikipedia and I will have nothing more to do with them. Scolaire (talk) 23:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, and don't forget to archive this! People looking at your talk page might get the impression that there are editors who disagree with you. Scolaire (talk) 23:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Are you cracking-up under some sort of strain or pressure or something Scolaire? Whilst I should just ignore your antagonism, I really have to reply to this childish behaviour from an allegedly 50-odd year old man.

You turn a simple comment on etiquette into an accusation of ad hominem. I disagree with that but then concede the issue of etiquette serves no purpose to the discussion. Then you post the above rant. Are you really so innocent and sqeuaky-clean? Really? Even after this recent unprovoked and uncalled for uncivil behaviour from yourself:
 * 1) The bundle of lies and convolution that was this, followed by an insistence of no apology despite the fact I showed how you were attempting to mislead other editors with lies and trouble-stirring. In fact it is a personal attack and very poor one at that. What was your reasoning behind posting it there in the first place?
 * 2) When I raised the Derry GAA issue proper you make claims that my proposals are badly-worded and that it is a case of POV pushing. No-one else seems to think so, only you. What POV-pushing at that? Clear incivility and bad faith on your part.
 * 3) Your use of illogical and irrational objections to my proposals and your eagerness to classify the discussion as "farcical" etc. and your willingness to disengage from the discussion in what are clear attempts to smother and deride the discussion and pretend that there is no problem with your IMoS tinkering despite the fact 3 other editors agree with my proposals (more than opposes) and that there is a clear violation.

I'm no squeaky-clean editor either, but at least I by on large can get on in a professional manner with other editors I disagree with if they do so in return. I might berate Brocach on his Derry POV pushing but as Talk:List_of_Gaelic_games_clubs_in_Ireland shows - I can work them none-the-less when there is reason and a willingness to co-operate.

Maybe you should realise that there are editors who disagree with you and that your edits are not perfect or universally accepted by all.

Maybe you should take a break from Wikipedia. These over the top ridiculous tirades from you recently I feel are a sign you really need to chill out a bit away from Cyberspace. Take the hint. Take a break. Have a kit-kat.

Mabuska (talk) 20:34, 29 January 2013 (UTC)